Well if security did in fact verify that it was being played from his own IP address and the fact that he vanished for days until the money was all gone only to show up then...I'm just not gonna buy anything he has to say. Given the state of online poker these days there might be a chance they wouldn't freeze his account even knowing it was hacked but the Mod here and the security team were looking into it so the fact that he was allowed to continue to play and hope he ran it up crazy high only to fail miserably at it suggest to me that the most feasible scenario is also the most likely...he wasn't hacked and is a dbag.

Any update on this?

Hambone4k and I have been in steady communication. So far he has been very cooperative.

I'm listening to his version of the affair, and asking many questions. The situation is complicated, but things are falling into place.

I apologize for the non-substantive FTP-like update, but the matter does deserve delicacy.

Not that I am perfect...NOT EVEN CLOSE...and I applaud your ability to be impartial and understanding in these situations. However, there is NO REASON he should not have sent the bank transfer regardless of what happened to his poker account..which from looking at the play history I, personally, would need a lot more than "Im serious guys, I was hacked". Even if he was, his bank account wasn't.

People like this only add more fuel to the anti-poker fire and add on to the mountain of dirtbags that get brought into the spotlight daily it seems. What does your typical "poker is full of bad people" lawmaker/average joe see when you talk about online poker? These guys and Full Tilt...it isn't the DN's of the world, its these situations that arise again and again and again.

Assuming he did everything he could once he noticed the accounts were breached (contacting the site to have his account closed, changing his passwords on the various sites etc), you still feel he should take the loss and pay hero in full?

Of course.

Why? Would you take the loss if someone stole your ID and took up loans in your name? Or breached your paypal account and bought unretreavable merchandise for it?

Don't see the difference.

It would suck real bad but it's not Heros fault if somebody hacked my account or stole my id so yeah I would expect to have to pay the full amount.

Why do you think Hero should take a loss?

If that guy got hacked and let someone play though 9k, he is a ******.

Btw, I changed my post above to a analogy that comes closer to the actual situation at hand. When someone steals from your bank account you are the only loser so its not really relevant to this.

My thoughts are that; Assuming Villian is completely innocent, they are both victims here. Villian made the mistake of letting his accounts get breached, while Hero didn't do properly due dilligence with whom he was trading with. Sharing the loss seems fair to me IF there is no doubt wether or not Villian is innocent. Any doubt what so ever Villian pays.

You also said its not Hero fault for Villian getting his account hacked which is true, but not doing proper due dilligence is.

I dunno I think that would set a very dangerous precedent.

I mean let's say I was in the **** and needed $10k real fast. I have not done many transfers on 2+2 before but I have people who can vouch for me so don't think it would be a problem finding someone to deal with me.

I could take the $10k, get a friend to go to an internet cafe with my passwords and then lose that $10k to me on my girlfriends account playing heads up. I then say my account has been hacked and only expect to pay out half the money so I make $5k while the innocent guy loses $5k because that is the standard that we would be setting in this thread.

It's late and I'm tired so maybe there are flaws in my little scam concoction but you get the idea.

You make a good point, and I'm not completely sure myself of what the standard line should be in these situations, hence why I asked in this thread.

If you are registered to alot of stuff online (which most people are these days) getting hacked is unavoidable at some point. So taking the full loss feels disgusting, especially if the victim was a stranger and blindly trusted me. I'd feel we were both resonsible.

Note: I'm just discussing the moral thing to do in situations like these. If there is any doubt hambone4k is innocent he should pay in full.

The way I see it, villain owes hero the money regardless of whether or not his account got hacked. They both agreed to a trade. Once hero sent the lock, he fulfilled his part of the agreement. Villain's misfortune doesn't void their agreement, and it sure as hell shouldn't be forced upon hero.

Whether or not merge shares the blame for not freezing the hacked account is a completely different story (depending on villain's story).

If his account got hacked, he never made a agreement to a trade. Hero was simply conned by the hacker.

So if someone took a loan in your name (false ID), you should pay the bank back their money in full? Is there any difference in these two cases?

Did villain's 2+2 account get hacked? If his 2+2 account did get hacked, then the 9k is pretty much gone. But if villain's 2+2 account didn't get hacked and only his lock account did, then villain did in fact agree to a trade and needs to uphold his side of the agreement. I actually thought that only villain's lock account got hacked - In which case if I'm wrong, then I pretty much agree with you.

If I took out a cash loan and then have it all robbed from me as I'm walking home, should I still have to pay the bank back the money in full?

lol if there is even any question that hambone intentionally did this and got "hacked" cmon bros...

I think/assumed his 2+2 account did too. If only his Lock account was hacked, then I completely agree. He should pay in full, it's not Heros problem.

Yes, but thats completely different from my example.

lol we're both arguing for the same idea then

Anyway, best of luck to OP in getting money back.

You are making absolutely ZERO sense to me. I don't care if I gave money to the biggest dbag in the world, he still owes it to me. His poker account was hacked, not his bank account anyway. If someone gave me $5k and someone takes it from me I still owe that guy $5k.

Hero sent poker funds for bank funds. If my poker account is then hacked and the money he gave me is now gone how does that in ANY WAY mean he should share in the loss? His bank account wasn't hacked (for the millionth time).

No, his 2+2 was not hacked. Every statement he has made (the few there have been) have pretty much collaborated this

The ONLY reason hambone is even talking to Clamp is because he already has a record and as such would most likely get more attention for the authorities that Clamp sent the info to. Had there not been a party such as Clamp involved here he would have gone on his merry way and pretended it never happened.

Your analogy is incorrect. It would be like you loaning 9k to someone who had it stolen by someone else. That person would still owe you the money even though someone stole it from that person.

If you read above you can see I; A) Assumed his 2+2 account was hacked as well B) He was completely innocent and did everything he could to help the situation when he was notified of the icident.

To the above my analogy works.

yup, clamp is a boss and hambone is a piece of ****

Apparently, bcgt178 sent 8K to Hambone.

For someone to even suggest that Hambone does not owe bcgt178 every penny of whatever was the agreed amount to be exchanged for the 8K of poker funds is absurd.

It doesn't matter if Hambone's account was actually hacked or not. Once those poker funds hit hambone's account, he is obligated to pay bcgt178 for those funds.

Period.

exactly